§Why CasetextPricing

Truthout et al v. Department of Justice

MOTION for Leave to File /Submit Ex Parte, In Camera Declaration

8 Cited authorities

  1. Phillippi v. Central Intelligence Agency

    546 F.2d 1009 (D.C. Cir. 1976)   Cited 335 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding CIA refusal to confirm or deny existence of records of CIA connection to activities of ship named the Hughes Glomar Explorer

  2. Gardels v. C. I. A.

    689 F.2d 1100 (D.C. Cir. 1982)   Cited 238 times
    Holding that information related to the CIA's covert contacts with individuals at universities across the United States was properly withheld because the agency's position was "detailed in affidavits and depositions, is specific and fleshed out as much as it can be done publicly, and is far from being merely conclusory"

  3. Benavides v. Drug Enforcement Admin

    968 F.2d 1243 (D.C. Cir. 1992)   Cited 35 times
    Finding error in district court's failure to scrutinize DEA's response under § 552(c) in light of allegation that informant's status had been "officially confirmed"

  4. Benavides v. Drug Enforcement Admin

    976 F.2d 751 (D.C. Cir. 1992)   Cited 17 times
    Construing the phrase "not subject to the requirements of this section" to "permit a Glomarization where the information's status has not been officially confirmed, but to permit analysis under other exemptions like that afforded any other document sought under FOIA, where the status has been so confirmed"

  5. Strang v. United States Arms Control & Disarmament Agency

    920 F.2d 30 (D.C. Cir. 1990)   Cited 1 times

    No. 89-5441. Argued November 1, 1990. Decided November 30, 1990. George A. Lehner, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Mark E. Nagle, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay B. Stephens, U.S. Atty., John D. Bates and R. Craig Lawrence, Asst. U.S. Attys., Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Civil Action No. 86-1057). Before BUCKLEY, WILLIAMS and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Opinion for the Court filed PER CURIAM. PER CURIAM:

  6. Section 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings

    5 U.S.C. § 552   Cited 12,304 times   558 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party

  7. Rule 7 - Pleadings Allowed; Form of Motions and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 7   Cited 7,742 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Defining "pleadings" for purposes of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

  8. Section 50.9 - Policy with regard to open judicial proceedings

    28 C.F.R. § 50.9   Cited 32 times
    Reciting "the vital public interest in open judicial proceedings" and stating the policy that DOJ counsel "shall not move for or consent to closure of a proceeding" unless "[n]o reasonable alternative exists for protecting the interests at stake" and "[f]ailure to close the proceedings will produce . . . substantial likelihood of denial of the right . . . to a fair trial"